Saturday, September 29, 2012



As mentioned in yesterday's posting I received a 7 page document from Chemtura at the start of Thursday night's CPAC meeting. The author is Alan Deal of Conestoga Rovers. It was dated September 26/12 and titled MEMORANDUM VOC and PHC results from CH-70D Groundwater Samples

This document arises from CRA's June 2012 Chemtura Progress Report in which we are advised that another consultant detected petroleum hydrocarbons in a groundwater sample taken from well CH-70D which is located a few metres west of the old Varnicolor site and perhaps a hundred metres or more east of off-site pumping well W4 and observation well OW57-32R. Jeff Merriman of Chemtura was rapidly, verbally denying the presence of these petroleum hydrocarbons at CPAC before I could see any possible reason why. Well the reason has become clearer.

CRA in denying their own May 1998 Progress Report's findings regarding DNAPL, did so based on the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons in their drilling mud recirculation tank. They claimed incorrectly that petroleum hydrocarbons were not found in nearby groundwater including OW57-32R (at a very high Method Detection Limit) and therefore it was possible that oil or another petroleum hydrocarbon was accidentally spilled into the drilling mud. That is ridiculous but when most of your audience including the M.O.E. are in on a 'sweetheart deal" then you can pretty much come up with whatever suits. As a former colleague was known to say "Adjusting the science according to your needs".

Petroleum hydrocarbons whether routinely tested for or not are throughout the Elmira Aquifers. There was free phase LNAPL including but not limited to BTEX chemicals (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylene) at both Varnicolor Chemical and Uniroyal Chemical. Both Peritus Environmental AND Conestoga Rovers detected Chlorobenzene and petroleum hydrocarbons at CH-70D in March and June 2012, respectively. Their concentrations and proportions between the two for both samples are very close to each other. Only after yours truly raised the matter at a public CPAC meeting did Chemtura start to deny the undeniable.

CRA's Memorandum gives a discription of two lab methods of determining the identification of chemical parameters. It is interesting, irrelevant and unconvincing. Statements such as "There are no "fuel type" hydrocarbons in this sample." fly in the face of their own detections. Are their arguments all semantics? Are they trying to suggest for example that BTEX chemicals are VOC's (they are) but NOT petroleum hydrocarbons (they are)? Further CRA state that the one lab method (GC/MS) confirms Chlorobenzene is present and is the only compound present (eluting) when their immediate previous paragraph confirmed "A few VOC's are detected at low concentrations but the major peak corresponds to chlorobenzene."

In the vernacular I suggest that CRA are preaching to the perverted, sucking and blowing simultaneously and overall promoting psuedo science. At the very least I expected some sort of apology/explanation as to how two different companies on two different dates came up with basically identical data which is now being denied by the second company (CRA) for what appears to be self serving motives. BIZARRE & UNCONVINCING !

Friday, September 28, 2012


Whatever the unofficial bounty is on my hide, I expect it may have risen last night. Item 4. on the CPAC Agenda is Delegations and yours truly spoke to Conestoga Rovers incredibly error ridden May/June 1998 Progress Reports as well as their recent August 29/12 Memorandum. I went into great lengths describing typographical errors and much worse as well as what clearly appears to be a serious attempt to cover up the existence of petroleum hydrocarbons throughout the Elmira Aquifers. CRA (Conestoga Rovers) are trying to suggest that that which they called DNAPL in 1998 has been found to be an accidental spill of oil into the drilling fluid recirculation tank. HOGWASH & HOOEY!

Literally at 6:02 pm. Jeff Merriman provided me with CRA's latest attempt at bolstering their so far pathetic attempts to coverup the discovery of probable DNAPL in the middle of the Elmira Aquifers. Most likely I will read it later today and most likely report on it shortly thereafter. As hopelessly boring and monotonous as CRA's 2011 Annual Monitoring Report was, at least they showed up. The Ontario Ministry of the Environment continue to reinforce their show up in body only status. CPAC and the public were promised a response from the M.O.E. for last night's meeting concerning those same DNAPL's found fourteen years ago behind Varnicolor Chemical and beside the Elmira water tower. Again they've publicly promised to respond at the next meeting on November 1/12.

Alan Deal of CRA presented the 2011 AMR. He got burned badly by both myself and Ron Campbell of CPAC on a few occasions. Alan's focus was on the CPAC & Woolwich Council discredited pump and treat system his company has promoted for the last twenty plus years in Elmira. He made controversial claims such as visible NAPL at OW10-5 being at best residual NAPL (non aqueous phase liquid) although that in itself is extremely serious and should have been removed decades ago. Further he referred to the high NDMA readings around OW60 north and west of Chemtura as being a "relic plume". Far more likely is it is an indication of another source area. Mr. Deal to my surprise was correct in stating that NDMA has been in the Bedrock Aquifer within Elmira for over twenty years. I looked that up and it has been there although I very clearly recall its' presence being denied over the years. That will take some more digging on my part.

Mr. Deal got burned big time on three matters. I suggest that any of the three speak to his overall veracity but that is for you the reader to decide. Ron Campbell and myself both took Mr. Deal to task for a pretty blatant attempt at making the off-site cleanup look sucessful. He kept repeating the number of wells with decreasing concentration trends of contaminants versus the very few with increasing trends. What he failed to point out, until called upon it, was the overwhelming number of off-site wells with no trends indicated.

Secondly his slides indicated that there was no Chlorobenzene in the Bedrock Aquifer in 2011. I asked him if there had ever been Chlorobenzene detected in the deepest aquifer namely the Bedrock Aquifer. He clearly stated that Chlorobenzene had never been found in the Bedrock Aquifer at which point I pointed out to him two wells in the 2011 Annual Monitoring Report which had had Chlorobenzene detected in them. He was not amused.

Mr. Deal also suggested that there were no detections of contaminants in the Canagagigue Creek in 2011. I pointed out to him Fig. 5.5 in the 2011 AMR which showed a very significant increase in NDMA in the "gig" for 2011. His response was that he hadn't written that section.

Sebastan (CPAC) raised some excellent questions in regards to a Figure in a recent report which shows the inability of Chemtura & CRA to maintain the off-site pumping wells to their targeted pumping rates.

One interesting moment came from George Karlos of the M.O.E.. Essentially he is asking CPAC for input as to whether they feel downstream testing in the Canagagigue Creek for Dioxins and DDT would be useful and if so he would like some specifics as to where exactly. Councillor & CPAC member Mark Bauman is strongly in favour of doing this but local resident Susan Bryant spoke against it. Funny but after you've been burned and lied to repeatedly over the years, you begin to ask yourself what exactly is going on here. Is this a worthwhile exercise or is it one more delaying tactic? Is one party attempting to set up CPAC to look bad or are everybody's motives sincere? Richard Clausi both of the EH-Team and the SWAT sub-committee of CPAC pointed out some inaccurate information which had been provided. It had been suggested by both George and Susan that there weren't sediments in the Canagagigue creek below Chemtura. Richard made it very clear that that was nonsense. The creek is neither on top of Bedrock nor is the bottom paved with asphalt or concrete. It's a rural creek with lots of surface discharge from fields and open areas.

Mark Bauman does have a point in that doing no testing downstream does create doubt in citizens minds. Further Susan Bryant raised an extremely important point dealing with a local farmer who has a swimming pond downgradient of GP1 & GP2; the location of ridiculously high concentrations of Dioxins and DDT on the Chemtura site. Allegedly the Grand River Conservation Authority are dragging their feet in giving approvals to Chemtura for their mickey mouse "cleanup" of GP1 & GP2. This could be true or simply an excuse for more delay. It is an interesting coincidence that Chemtura's partners in pollution, the M.O.E., are now deciding that with CPAC approval they could do some downstream testing. The timing is equisite and takes the heat off Chemtura for their foot dragging and obstensibly puts it on CPAC waiting for their input to testing.

David Marks (CPAC) crafted an excellent Resolution which was passed concerning the peer review of chemtura's site wide AIR, ECA (certificate of approval). Basically CPAC agree that all the technical hoops and loops have been attended to however further study is needed regarding multiple issues dealing with odours, air health effects and synergistic effects of multiple air contaminants despite each individual toxin being below provincial requirements and standards.

Lastly CPAC were treated to a most weird and disturbing series of comments from hydrogeologist Eric Hodgins of the Region of Waterloo. He kept emphasizing that the Region of Waterloo have no responsibility for nor apparent interest in the Elmira Wellfield, which is under remediation. Further he indicated that the rules around the ongoing Source Protection Plans mandated by the province and being implemented by the GRCA completely precluded the Elmira north and south wellfields from being included. SAY WHAT? CPAC members as well as myself were quite perplexed by these comments. Eric kept repeating that Chemtura had purchased the south wellfield wells from the Region and thus the Region had no further concerns/input. I am confident that what Eric refused to specifically say, but what I interpret, is shared by others at last night's meeting. I believe that the Region of Waterloo are speaking out of both sides of their mouth. They are publicly proclaiming that the Elmira wellfields will be restored to drinking water standards by 2028 while making absolutely no plans or provisions for the likelihood of it happening. This includes no comments on gas stations and car dealerships being built next to the south wellfield in contravention of any and all source protection plans for municipal wells.

Thursday, September 27, 2012


Public CPAC Meeting Tonite 6 pm. in Woolwich Council Chambers, Church St. Elmira

The Elmira south wellfield was shut down in November 1989. The north wellfield was shut down a few months later. Twenty-three years later and the authorities are still bafflegabbing and bullshitting the public. It started with a five man M.O.E. team allegedly looking for the sources of NDMA (& more) in the south wellfield. It escalated with an October 7, 1991 Settlement Agreement a.k.a. "Sweetheart deal" between the Ministry of the Environment and Uniroyal Chemical. Six parties to the Environmental Appeal Board hearings received copies of that disgusting document. The public did not until this past spring when Woolwich Council released it to the Chemtura Public Advisory Committee (CPAC).

How have the company and M.O.E. avoided being run out of town on a rail? Firstly by nature Canadians tend to be more prone to ask questions first rather than rush to judgement. Secondly all the authorities at the time held private meetings, out of the public view, and came up with a deal. Keep in mind that all the authorities by definition shared at least some of the massive blame and guilt arising out of permitting a for profit company to grossly pollute both the Canagagigue Creek and all the local groundwater. This took decades of serious mismanagement and negligence by Uniroyal and others hiding under their umbrella. It took an abdication of responsibility by both the M.O.E., GRCA, Waterloo Region and successive Woolwich Councils.

After half the cat was out of the bag the serious bullshit began. In order to sell a non sensical cleanup the M.O.E. decided to ostensibly involve the public via some sort of public advisory committee. This PAC would have literally no resources, no technical expertise, no authority and would be tightly controlled if at all possible. Woolwich Council took the lead in organizing and running the Uniroyal Public Advisory Committee including the Chairmanship etc.. It was much looser in the early days because the citizens through APT Environment were very active and appropriately suspicious. Indeed there had been serious consideration by APTE not to participate in what they rightly viewed as an attempt to co-opt them and water down their voices. It wasn't until 2000 that Chair and Councillor Pat Mclean went through a mock debate about having CPAC become a committee of Woolwich Council.

All the full time technical expertise was provided by Uniroyal/Chemtura via their consultants. Occasionally UPAC/CPAC would be graced by the M.O.E's hydrogeologist. Although hydrogeology is not rocket science nevertheless any "profession" worth it's salt develops insider's acronyms and complicating language intentionally. Hydrogeology is all about interpretations of usually incomplete data. Combine this with a system of literally inundating citizens with neverending, often unecessary reports and it's not difficult to get their eyes to glaze over. This is how Chemtura and their full time paid allies have run UPAC/CPAC in circles for over two decades. With co-opted insiders on CPAC it also was not too difficult to marginalize the very few citizens who knew what was truly going on.

This set up is currently in jeopardy for Chemtura and the M.O.E.. Astounding as it seems the wholesale massacre of the old CPAC has brought in fresh blood, open minds and some limited technical expertise to CPAC. There still is the spectre of Woolwich Council attempting to control things but the volunteer citizens on CPAC are not prepared to roll over at the first signs of trouble. They have a mandate and they have ethics and morals which they aren't prepared to throw down the tubes blindly following either politicians or government bureaucrats. They are their own persons.

Wednesday, September 26, 2012


Yesterday one of the Chemtura Public Advisory Committee members e-mailed an article titled "Breaking the Taboo on "Toilet to Tap"". Apparently the technology is quite capable of further treating sewage treatment effluent to the point where it becomes drinkable. Ughh! Unsurprisingly there has been some resistance to the idea even in areas of the arid U.S. southwest. Fortunately the spin doctors have been busy and have come up with various terms that make the idea more palatble, so to speak. "Indirect potable reuse" is one of the terms. "Recycled water" also works. Orange County in the U.S. is building a "Groundwater Replenishment System (GRS). Afterall doesn't a rose by any other name smell as sweet?

I certainly don't dispute the need for more water supplies. I also have long understood that even raw sewage in our sanitary sewers is by volume well over 95% pure water. Similarily our industrial discharges with or without solvent and other additions are primarily water. I also believe that with adequate filtration and treatment that we can literally take water from mud puddles on the ground and make it drinkable. Similarily it is technically possible to take seawater and make it drinkable. Why don't we do that on a large scale? It's not as if we lack seawater or that levels are dropping. The reason is cost.

Cost and volume are what worry me. Large scale water supplies will eventually be routinely privatised, most probably in the U.S. first. Eventually private industry will see an opportunity to cut costs ie. treatment- Not good. Secondly are the volumes involved. Current water treatment here in Ontario relies on treatment of either groundwater or surface water or both. Errors, mechanical breakdowns etc. do take place and have taken place. Recently the Region of Waterloo were fined for inadvertently allowing undisinfected water into the distribution system in Cambridge. It's one thing having a "slip" or "boo boo" happen with relatively clean source water. What do you think of a "slip" involving toilet water? Finally have we so soon forgotten the lessons of the Walkerton Inquiry? The "multi barrier" approach is our best chance of avoiding future disasters and tragedies. In other words start with safe, well protected water in the first place. Allowing contaminated water as source water and then relying on manmade, error prone humans and their technology to "treat" it is idiotic. At least it's idiotic here. In the middle of the Sahara Desert maybe there are no other sources. Here there are.

Tuesday, September 25, 2012


The Waterloo Region Record on Sat. Sept. 12/12 carried this story "Couple plans to sue province over wind farms". The Drennan's own a farm north of Goderich near the proposed Kingsbridge II wind farm. The nearest turbine would be about 600 metres from their house. They and their lawyer Julian Falconer are asking the courts for an injunction to halt the project until health studies can be conducted.

Apparently all parties are willing to agree that there is a lack of peer reviewed science on both sides of the health issue around wind farms. Another issue that the Drennan's are fighting are the nondisclosure agreements preventing people from discussing any health issues they are having, possibly related to wind farms. In my opinion these confidentialuty clauses which are standard in so many disputes are contrary to the public interest and normally heavily favour the interests of one party only. Last but not least Ontario's chief medical officer of health , Dr. Arlene King, has been ordered by the courts to testify but she is appealing that decision. This position is a heavily politicized one and it's hard to understand how there could not be a conflict of public versus government interests involved.

Monday, September 24, 2012


Saturday's Waterloo Region Record advises us of yet another former contaminated factory site being turned into residential housing, namely condominiums. The title of the article is "Condo project starts at old Kanmet Foundry". Waterloo Region seem to be front and centre in this process which would include all three of our biggest cities. Certainly the contaminated Sunar and Canbar properties in Waterloo as well as the recently cleaned up site of Pannill Veneer on Louisa St. in Kitchener are examples.

What I feel lacking is transparency and accountability. Our municipal, regional and provincial governments seem unwilling to hold these business owners accountable and responsible for the contamination of both their property and of public property including air and groundwater. The Kanmet site has sat idle for over twenty years with foundry sands and buried tanks left behind in the natural environment. Rather obviously our politicians have written pollution laws that are either riddled with loopholes or which are simply not enforced. I suspect that it is a combination of both and it's not by accident.

Money rules and the making of more money for indiviuals rules all decisions and legislation. If the city for example aren't willing or able to chase down the owners of Kanmet to clean up their mess, then they pretend that the contamination hasn't left the site or won't leave the site. Then they wait for a developer to express an interest and the negotiations begin. How much cleanup is the developer willing to pay for and how much public tax money will get thrown into the pot to subsidize that development.

Here is where the transparency issue exists. How much of the technical cleanup data and reports are readily available to the public, including nearby neighbours? How much of this data is made available to the new purchasers or are they kept completely in the dark? If it is our provincial Ministry of the Environment who make the final decision as to what is clean enough then we are in trouble. Their credibility is in the dumpster due in part to their willingness to deceive the public and repeatedly minimize all environmental issues, probably for political reasons.

Here in Waterloo Region our dependency on groundwater is well documented. What is not well documented is the extent of industrial pollution of our public groundwater. Whether it be the William St. wells in Waterloo, the long closed Lancaster Wellfield in Kitchener, the closed Forwell wells near Breslau; huge issues at the Middleton wellfield in Cambridge, nearby wells at Bishop St. or the complete shutdown of the wellfields in Elmira; we are in big trouble and the continuing legacy of allowing industrial owners to abandon and walk away from their pollution is a big part of that.

Saturday, September 22, 2012


There is a new date for the West Montrose Water Supply Class Environment Assessment. According to today's Woolwich Observer the date has been changed from last Tuesday to this coming Wednesday again at Conestogo Public school from 5-7 pm. Sorry for any inconveniences this change may have caused.

Secondly The Elmira Independent has printed a Notice indicating a corrected date for a public meeting on the Draft Source protection plan for the Grand river watershed.. It will bve held this Monday sept. 24/12 from 7-9 pm. at 1001 Erb's Road , RR3 Waterloo. The building is a Regional Emergency Services Training and Research Complex.

Yesterday's Woolwich Observer has both a story and an Editorial in regards to the Jigs Hollow aka the Kuntz Pit. Resident Laurie Breed was at the Sept. 18/12 Council meeting again speaking to Council for the need to protect the Winterbourne Valley from inappropriate and uncompatible development. We are advised that there is about four days of mediation planned between the parties with the hope of narrowing disagreements prior to any possible OMB hearing.

The mix has been somewhat added to with a business arrangement now between Kuntz and Preston Sand & Gravel. This development has caused some consternation amongst the citizens objecting to this pit. In his Editorial Steve Kannon lets us know that historically there has been an imbalance in power. "Yes or no, council's decision on gravel pits is likely to lead to a hearing before the OMB, which has a track record of ignoring local decisions in favour of developers.". Personally I am still hopeful of at least two wins out of three for local residents and I haven't given up on a clean sweep (3 wins).

Friday, September 21, 2012


Rueters news agency via the internet is the source for this article. The title is "Colorado man awarded $7.2 mill in "popcorn lung" lawsuit". These lawsuits have been going on for a number of years in the U.S.. Originally it was employees in popcorn plants who were diagnosed and then they sued for damages. This particular gentleman, Wayne Watson, was the first consumer awarded damages due to the damage done to his lungs by the artificial butter flavouring, known as Diacetyl.

The significance of course is that here in Elmira we all had the pleasure of inhaling Uniroyal/Chemtura Diacetyl fumes for years. The irony is that we knew all the horrid and toxic chemicals they dealt with, and were reassurred when all we smelled was butter flavouring (Diacetyl). Meanwhile Chemtura are in the process of receiving a site wide certificate of approval for air from the M.O.E. and are advising CPAC of how far they've come regarding air emissions. The problem of course is that they are untrustworthy. Like certain pesticides they only stop producing particular profitable poisons including Diacetyl long after their side effects are known.

Then we need to know how exactly trustworthy the Ontario M.O.E. are. Recently there was a massive fish kill in the western end of lake Erie. At the time the M..O.E. were suggesting natural causes such as a temperature inversion or lake rolling that brought up oxygen depleted water from the bottom which killed the fish. To date I've seen nothing in the mainstream media which disputes this. Back on September 6/12 I wrote here in the Advocate the findings and experiences of an expert colleague in regards to lake erie fisheries. He has continued his investigation and indeed the Ministry of Natural Resources are aware that the cause of the fish kill was anoxia or a lack of oxygen. They however also ackowledge that the cause of this anoxia is man made. It is a result of nutrient loading to Lake Erie from agricultural sources for example which promotes algal growth and eventual decay on the bottom. This decay consumes oxygen and away we go. In my opinion it is shameful that government agencies refuse to publicly acknowledge man made pollution causing major deaths in the natural environment; essentially for political motivations. The media's lack of followup is also very discouraging.

Thursday, September 20, 2012


Next Thursday September 27/12 at 6 pm. CPAC will be held in the Woolwich Council chambers. There are a number of current, ongoing and important matters to discuss as well as the usual number of red herrings put forward by Chemtura. A couple of these red herrings include the RWDI peer review of Chemtura's site wide certificate of Approval (air). The other would be their so called five year review of their pump and treat system. The young CPAC have dealt with the Chemtura/CRA hydraulic containment cleanup plan very straightforwardly. They have rejected it as being inadequate without source removal being required including off-site source removal of subsurface contamination. Nevertheless CRA and Chemtura are bringing forth more paperwork and quite frankly nonsense for the purpose of dazzling and burying CPAC in paperwork. In regards to the RWDI peer review let me boil this down to its' essence. I see advantages to both the M.O.E. and Chemtura in this plan. The question is "Where is the public benefit?" Exactly what if anything is in a site wide Air C. of A. for the public? If the answer is nothing then CPAC are simply being used by the M.O.E/Chemtura as allegedly being part of public consultation on the matter.

What should be of significance is the M.O.E.'s comments regarding off-site DNAPL behind the old Varnicolor Union St. site. Further discussion should also revolve around Chemtura's scraping and capping Dioxins and DDT in their south-east corner. Further discussion should revolve around future source removal of DNAPLS and LNAPLS on the Chemtura site. Most of the rest is filler and time wasters which are the M.O.E.'s and Chemtura's specialties.

Wednesday, September 19, 2012


They probably knew that they were in trouble the day after the last municipal election. They had developed a longlasting, ongoing rapport with Woolwich Council which mirrored their relationship with the Region and the province. They played ball locally and their air emissions were a fraction of the horrible days back in the very late 90's. They learned that out of site contaminated groundwater could safely be bafflegabbed but in your face air emissions were hard to bullshit away.

Along comes a new Council to rock the boat. The new Mayor had also been making disturbing noises during the campaign. Multi national world class corporate polluters prefer the staus quo. Nevertheless even their old public advisory committee seemed to be in jeopardy. The old CPAC Chair was a former Councillor and had just run against the winning Mayor unsucessfully. She also was a member of the former CCPA (Canadian Chemical Producers Assoc'n) National Advisory Board.

Late spring 2011 confirmed Chemtura's worst fears. The entire old public advisory committee were not reappointed and horror of horrors not only did the new CPAC have some very bright people on it but they also had yours truly. The new CPAC had bright, competent independent thinkers, two environmental technical people and myself who knows the history and figuratively where the bodies are buried.

A year after that, namely this past spring, CPAC unanimously passed a Resolution which was a very professional, smooth denunciation of the past twenty years of pretend cleanup here in Elmira. To add salt to the wounds, Woolwich Council also endorsed unanimously, CPAC's Resolution. At this point in time Woolwich Council who have sent this Resolution on to the Region, the Province and the Assoc'n of Municipalities of Ontario are seeking an audience with our provincial Environment Minister. This will be a very, very difficult pill for the Ontario M.O.E. to swallow. They are masters of manipulation, misdirection and delay. Their expertise lies in backroom deals with polluters while waving red herring Control Orders around for public consumption. Stay tuned as the battle unfolds.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012


Well here's a name from the past both in Woolwich Township as well as further afield. Bob Verdun, former owner and editor of the Elmira independent has weighed in upon the LRT plans in Kitchener-Waterloo. His Letter to the Editor in yesterday's Waterloo Region Record asks the very sensible question as to why the Region are spending $51 million on improving a bottleneck on Weber St.. The title of his Letter is "Light rail transit is doomed to failure" and he makes a compelling case. This bottlenck occurs at the south end of Waterloo at Guelph St. and runs for several blocks down to Victoria St. The rest of Weber St. is four lanes and is a major artery through the cities. As Mr. Verdun indicates, this road widening will simply make motorists even less likely to park their cars in favour of LRT, so why do it?

Monday, September 17, 2012


The title in Saturday's Waterloo Region Record was "Waste water plant nearly year behind schedule". Quite frankly I'm just glad that the Waterloo plant, similar to the Kitchener plant is receiving a major overhaul. The Kitchener waste water plant upgrades were described here on September 3/12. Both of these upgrades will give at least some relief to our overburdened Grand River as well as to downstream communities such as Brantford and others who use the river for drinking water.

I've just recently been reviewing old technical reports concerning one plant along the river which for decades dumped/leaked and spewed industrial chemicals into the Grand River. This would be the Canadian General Tower plant at the south end of Cambridge. The example of human hypocrisy at its' best is exemplified by this company then winning environmental awards after the damage they had done to both the natural environment and probably to human beings downstream in Brantford. The awards were for their "cleanup" of a mess of such significance that instead of winning awards they should have been sent to jail. Only in Canada!

Back to the waterloo sewage plant. Apparently it and the Kitchener upgrades will cost taxpayers $108 million. This is money well spent. If you're going to keep bringing people into the watershed you've either got to improve sewage treatment and its' discharge to the Grand River or else find an alternative technology. That is my wish that the time will come when we don't dump our human wastes (treated or otherwise) into the drinking water source for others.

The designation of the Grand River as a heritage river many years ago may actually have focused enough attention on the river to spur politicians into spending our tax money more wisely on needs rather than on frivolous "legacy" projects for their own gratification and edification. This would include things like LRT trains and mega million dollar theatres.

Saturday, September 15, 2012


Rule # 6 is sometimes referred to as the "you'll never find what you don't look for" rule". Classic local examples would include deeper contamination at the old Varnicolor site on Union St.. The M.O.E. promised a deep investigation and then reneged on doing it. It's also my suspicion that if the M.O.E. wanted to find a lot more than just Ammonia at the old Nutrite (Yara) they could, but that again would muddy the Uniroyal/Chemtura myth of them being the sole destroyer of the Elmira drinking water aquifers.

Similarily NDMA was not tested for on Varnicolor's Lot 91 at the extreme eastern end of Oriole Parkway twenty years ago. Recently it was tested for and found at low concentrations. I wonder what those concentrations would have been twenty plus years ago? Chlorobenzene was not found on the Union St. site. That makes absolutely no sense or logic whatsoever for a company which handled paints and solvents.

Similarily we've been advising Chemtura that merely testing surface samples for Dioxins at GP1 & GP2 makes no sense. These Dioxins were released in a mixture of solvents which percolated down into the sand and gravel at this south-east corner of their site. Chemtura understand that a one foot deep hole is a lot cheaper than a ten foot deep hole to dig and then dispose of.

Back in 1998 Conestoga Rovers and Uniroyal inadvertently discovered what CRA described as possible DNAPL behind the Union St. Varnicolor site. With M.O.E. acquiesence they did nothing, including mentioning it at the Uniroyal Public Advisory Committee meeting. Three years ago I found the information in an old monthly Progress Report and I've been publicly pushing for comments or explanation ever since. Last month, fourteen years after the event, we got an "explanation" from CRA. They now tell us that it is possible that someone spilled an oil product into the drilling fluid container and hence their comments about DNAPLS being 100 feet below surface were incorrect.
This month the M.O.E. have promised to look into this matter and report to CPAC. I expect that their version may include aliens, UFOs and or fairy dust. Jeff Merriman's reasoning for Chemtura's taking three years to respond to a legitimate public question about their consultant's findings was that the member of the public asking the question wasn't a CPAC member and hence CPAC wasn't asking the question. Well excuse me all to hell Mr. Merriman. That is exactly why Chemtura do not and never have deserved to be verified under *Responsible Care. You have a duty of honesty and transparency to the public not just to the citizens nominated by the Municipal Council to CPAC.

This is why honest citizens usually end up walking away from government involved agencies and committees. The level of sophisticated deception, manipulation and prevarication is literally too much for people other than professional liars to stomach over the long haul.

Friday, September 14, 2012


Rule #1: never admit a site is beyond redemption
Rule #2: always be in control of the process
Rule #3: never give any technical credibility to anyone not on the payroll
Rule #4: delay/delay/delay
Rule #5: always withold comprimising data

Two days ago I described my concerns surrounding the Middleton wellfield in Cambridge. A few facts need to be clearly enunciated. Literally for years Canadian General Tower attempted to prove that their site could only possibly contribute a tiny amount of groundwater to that being pumped by the Middleton wells. This was partly done by claiming a groundwater divide at the north end of their property whereby only a small amount of their contaminated water actually flowed north to the municipal wells while the rest flowed south away from them. Trichloroethylene to this day or at least all last year (2011) is still routinely being pumped from the bedrock aquifers by the Middleton wells. This can be found in the Region of Waterloo Annual Water Reports, on-line, on their website.

What concerns me as much as what I know is in the Middleton Wellfield is that which I don't know. This would include chemicals known as extractables or BNA's as well as chemicals known as phthalates. Both are in the groundwater at C.G.T.. Because they are mostly "sinkers" or DNAPLS they would have sunk through the sand and gravel and entered the fractured bedrock. They are of very low solubility which means you would be very unlikely to come up with particularily high dissolved concentrations. Two of the phthalates which are floaters are indeed at high concentrations and part of the LNAPLS floating on the watertable. Here is the kicker. The Region of Waterloo don't publish the results of many common and ubiquitous chemicals in their Annual Reports including NDMA, toluene, xylenes etc. They also don't publish results for many DNAPL chemicals such as the BNA's and denser phthalates. As they have been released into the natural environment next door at C.G.T. and have been so found then there is no good reason for the Region not to test for and publish the results for them in their Annual Water Report especially for the Middleton Wellfield. Unless of course, Rule #5 applies.

Thursday, September 13, 2012


In my opinion my friend and colleague, Dr. Henry Regier is much too humble for his and the environments' good. Therefore while I have his written O.K. to include specific questions and paragraphs in this posting, he didn't comment on whether I could/should use his name. I'm assuming YES! Therefore the following questions and comments are from Henry and I will endeavour to answer them briefly.

In regards to municipal wellfields in Elmira, Cambridge and Breslau: "You might query how many of those, if any, have been remediated fully, or are even undergoing remediation currently? Further, how many are now included in the draft plan with respect to which GRCA has issued a call for fundable proposals to protect well-field areas, inter alia?

Response: None of those three have been remediated fully. Elmira and Breslau (Safety-Kleen) have pump and treat systems. The Forwell wellfield (K70 & K71) downgradient of Safety-Kleen have been offline since the early 90's despite the Region's assurances it was only a bacteria problem. Across the road from Cambridge's Middleton Wellfield there is also a pump and treat system in place. I expect that in theory at least these wellfields are covered by the GRCA's draft plan.

Query: "In a recent e-mail I wondered whether some contaminated areas in our Basin are beyond technical remediation, with current technologies. If so, should the relevant governmental authorities make a list of such lost causes public?"

Response: Yes and Yes. Certainly they are beyond remediation with pump and treat technology. Massive amounts of money and source removal could restore both Elmira and the Breslau wells (K70 & K71). I have grave concerns and doubts in regards to the Middleton Wellfield (see yesterday's post) because it involves Bedrock Aquifers and is much more technically difficult to remediate. Pump and treat won't even begin to remediate fractured bedrock aquifers.

Query: "Didn't Pat Potter and some activist colleagues, perhaps including Susan Bryant and yourself, create a list of badly contaminated locales in our Basin and publicize this list, with appropriate hoopla, about 20 years ago?"

Response: Yes although my recollection is that the idea and organization with assistance was done by Brenda Thompson of Groundwater Alert in Cambridge. The hoopla was limited due to media apparently having more important things to cover at the time.

Thanks Henry!

Wednesday, September 12, 2012


Fate And Transport of DNAPLS in the Subsurface

Up here in Elmira we are dealing with Dense Non Aqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPLS) in a reasonably well understood subsurface regimen. This subsurface regimen consistes of silt, sand, gravel, and clay otherwise known as overburden. This overburden in Elmira and many parts of Waterloo Region is approximately one hundred feet thick. It sits upon Bedrock which locally consists of dolostone and limestone. By the way even though our subsurface here is well understood, we are dealing with DNAPLS very badly. That is to say that we are ignoring them. We are ignoring them both on and off the Chemtura property. This is but one more of many pieces of evidence which make it clear to me that our regional and provincial authorities are deceiving us, the public, about restoring the Elmira drinking water aquifers.

Cambridge are in a lot more trouble than we are. We are obtaining only slightly contaminated water (hopefully) from Waterloo via a pipeline. Cambridge rely for between 40 and 50% of their drinking water from the Middleton Wellfield, at the south end of town, beside the Grand River. They have had mostly low , sometimes higher, levels of industrial solvents in their drinking water for decades. The most obvious source is their next door neighbour, Canadian General Tower. They have been subjected to M.O.E. Control Orders and charges and most appropriately so. I do know that years ago I read a provincial officers report concerning their day to day housekeeping and handling of liquid wastes and I was appalled. There probably have been vague suggestions of other nearby sources of solvents to the Middleton Wellfield and if true should have been investigated. If that honestly happened then Cambridge is ahead of Elmira on that one point.

Cambridge and the Middleton Wellfield are in my opinion buggered royally because of their geology. Their overburden is practically non existent. Parts of Cnd. Gen. Tower (CGT) have an overburden of between 1 and 4.5 metres. That's it folks! In other words the bedrock is exposed at the surface. There is no easily understood major sand and gravel aquifers and clay confining layers 100 feet thick to protect the fractured Bedrock Aquifers which supply the Middleton Wellfield. It gets worse. Sand and gravel have predictable flow patterns. Bedrock does not. The fate and transport of DNAPLS in the subsurface are UNKNOWN within bedrock. The likelihood of finding pooled free phase DNAPL sitting on top of the bedrock is slim. It will have moved into the bedrock where it will sit either as residual or free phase depending on the size of the fractures and numerous other factors. It is my opinion based upon strong evidence that the Bedrock Aquifer beside and below this wellfield is permanently contaminated.

Enter the politicians. Business, development, expansion and money all hinge upon confidence that Cambridge can accomodate growth, both residential and commercial. I believe that the decison was made a long time ago that deceiving the public was in everybody's best interests. Waterloo Region are still eyeing a pipeline to Lake Erie down the road. The only possible reason for that in my opinion is that the gate was shut after the horse had bolted. Too many of our underground aquifers are comprimised.

The Walkerton water tragedy spawned the Walkerton Inquiry headed by Justice O'Connor. His recommendations included a multi barrier approach to drinking water safety. Multi barrier meant safeguards from the beginning in the ground, raw water, through pumping and treatment and finally via the distribution system to individual homes. It included testing and monitoring throughout, however with the clear understanding that comprimised water was to be dealt with effectively at the source of the problem. It was not to be allowed to move along through the system, counting upon for example later treatment to make the water O.K.. The Region of Waterloo have increased water treatment at the Middleton Wellfield. With inadequate Annual Water Reports they attempt to prove that the water is O.K. once into the distribution system. Any drinking water system dependent upon treatment of variable concentrations of multiple contaminants is not following the spirit of the Walkerton Inquiry. It is a prescription for disaster that only requires a failure in engineering, human error , mechanical failure or any other small error to have major consequences. The Titanic sunk, the space shuttle blew up and bridges collapse. Engineering and mechanical failures occur every day. The source water is contaminated.

Tuesday, September 11, 2012


The following article was in last Thursday's Elmira Independent "Money available to landowners for well, septic projects". The money comes from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment as part of the implementation of the Ontario Clean Water Act. This is the legislation which came about after the Walkerton water tragedy. Just as an aside Walkerton took place while the Conservatives were in power provincially and after they had severely cut M.O.E. funding. That being said there was lots of blame to go around and the Conservatives weren't the only ones with blood on their hands.

It is the GRCA (Grand River Conservation Authority) which are administering the distribution of this money. "The grants are available for properties near the municipal drinking water sources that are the most vulnerable to potential contamination. These are within the Wellhead Protection Areas around municipal wells and the Intake Protection Zones around surface water intakes identified through the Drinking Water Source Protection Program.".

Further information can be obtained via or 519-621-2761, Ext. 2268.

Monday, September 10, 2012


We are advised of that charming bit of news above, courtesy of last Saturday's Waterloo Region Record. The title is "City may consider brownfield incentives". The writer of this article is focusing on whether or not the City of Waterloo actually needs incentives for developers. Apparently land is in high demand within Waterloo's city limits and "There's usually a bidding war for any property that comes on the market.". The City of Kitchener as well as Cambridge on the other hand both have brownfield incentive programs in cooperation with the Region of Waterloo. Are we to assume that Kitchener and Cambridge are less attractive locations for developers without $$$ incentives or are those two cities merely playing fast and loose with taxpayers monies?

Or are we completely missing the point here? This province has an Environmental Protection Act. Both by its' wording prohibiting discharges of contaminants which could cause an adverse effect as well as its' prohibition of contamination leaving the owners' property; you would think that contaminated sites whether abandoned or not would be a rarity. You would be wrong. The older I get and the more I pay attention; the more disgusted I become with our industrial legacy. Factorys and industries in Cambridge, Kitchener, Waterloo and Elmira have on the whole, been disgusting pigs. They have dumped, leaked, buried and poured their industrial wastes en masse into our shared groundwater, surface water and air. The majority of these pigs should not be in the Waterloo Region Hall of Fame, they should be in jail. Lest we forget the golden rule however: THOSE WITH THE GOLD MAKE THE RULES. The other important rule is THAT THE WINNERS USUALLY WRITE HISTORY. "Winners" in this case means those well off individuals and elites who among other things can afford their own pet politicians. Make no mistake, behind most sucessful politicians is money. That money does not come from the masses it comes from wealthy individuals and lobby groups.

Therefore I see these brownfield incentives as proof positive that our environmental legislation and enforcement is a joke. Yes we have numerous ongoing heavily polluted businesses in Waterloo Region who are not cleaning up their properties. They are allegedly "containing" them. When they close their doors, even after decades of containment (hydraulic) or otherwise , they will leave their mess for the next generation. That generation will then pay via their taxes to provide incentives for developers to clean up that which should be cleaned up now. Two such sites out of many include Canadian General Tower in Cambridge and Chemtura Canada in Elmira. This is only possible with the implicit support and approval of municipal, regional and provincial authorities.

Saturday, September 8, 2012


Yesterday's Woolwich Observer carried this Public Notice. The meeting will be held on Tuesday September 18/12 5-7pm. at Conestogo Public School on Sawmill Rd. in the village of Conestogo. Currently their water supply is derived from four river wells also known as infiltration wells. The good news with wells of this sort is that while relatively shallow they rarely go dry as they are constantly being recharged (infiltrated) by the river itself. The problem arises with quality issues. A pure dug or drilled well through sand and gravel only draws groundwater into itself and the groundwater is prefiltered by the sand and gravel. A river well on the other hand is drawing both groundwater as well as surface water from the river (Grand). Often this water is reasonably clean however in agricultural areas there are greater opportunities for cryptosporidium and guardia etc. These nasty bugs are courtesy of cattle and other critters upstream using the river and floodplain as their toilets.

Overall the water table is very high in the West Montrose area enabling individual use of shallow wells. Indeed the decade myself and my family lived in West Montrose we had four families using a spring box as our entire water supply. The spring box was about four feet square by three feet deep and was fed by shallow groundwater. For a larger more secure water supply even in drought periods a deeper drilled well further from the river is probably the best bet. That scenario would also reduce treatment costs of the water as well.

Friday, September 7, 2012


Yesterday's Elmira Independent carrys this story: "Solar projects seek local support". Two business people spoke to Woolwich Council earlier this week about new rules concerning the Province's FIT or Feed in Tarrif program. Until now companies or individuals seeking to produce renewable electricity would apply directly through the FIT program to be able to feed their excess electricity into the power grid and receive compensation. Now the OPA or Ontario Power Authority have tied in their application forms via a points system to local municipal councils. Apparently the OPA believe this will prioritize energy projects coming to them as prior municipal council approval will add major points to the applications.

I must say that I find this a little odd. The two business persons namely Derek Satnik and Melissa Clark who presented at Council also were not happy with this new system. Their message was that it added a layer of bureaucracy and hoop jumping to the process and was onerous for both local councils and the businesses involved. To my wee mind it almost seems as if the province and the OPA are trying to spread the responsibility (read blame) if something goes wrong. Heaven forbid that any private entrepreneur would ever try to take advantage of any government program but if it happened the OPA could point the finger, after the fact, and say well the local municipality gave their approval first.

Thursday, September 6, 2012


The best lies have some truth within them. In other words suggesting that aliens from outer space are attacking fish species within lake Erie, probably wouldn't sell. On the other hand suggesting that the fish kill was due to natural causes, namely "lake inversion" is a winner because it is half right. "Lake inversion" is indeed a scientifically recognized phenomenon. Also stating that there is less oxygen at the bottom of the shallower areas of Lake Erie is correct. The term is anoxic.

A retired, world recognized Biologist and Lake Erie fisheries expert advises in regards to major fish kills due to either "lake inversion" or anoxic water that " never happened before Europeans came to North America". Even more bluntly he states that the fish kills in the 60's & 70's as well as in the last decade are "...all caused by humans...".

The key is what has caused these oxygen depleted "dead zones" on the bottom of Lake Erie as well as in shallower parts of Lake Huron and Lake Michigan. Intensive agriculture is a part of it. Phosphates were removed from laundry detergents in order to reduce the sudsing and foaming in receiving waterways below sewage treatment plants. Concrete holding tanks were built on farms in order to reduce direct drainage of nitrogen, phosphates and more from animal sewage. Finally many sewage treatment plants added tertiary treatment which again helped reduce phosphate loading from industrial sources as well as from human sewage. All these actions helped.

Enter global warming/climate change. Warmer weather and water, longer each summer combined with ever more people, human sewage and animals grazing still in floodplains and or with direct access to waterways. Woolwich Township need only look along the Conestogo River where the expressway crosses it just south of St. Jacobs to see that. The crap from those cattle and thousands more is not removed from the Conestogo and then into the Grand River and finally into Lake Erie. Hence we now have large, toxic algal blooms on many local water bodies as well as on Lake Erie.

These algal blooms die and sink to the bottom. They then begin to decompose. It is this decomposition which requires oxygen and removes it from the water. The larger the algal blooms originally on the surface, the more the decomposition on the bottom and the greater the oxygen depletion of the water. Then when you have a "lake inversion" with colder water sinking and displacing the bottom water, the oxygen depleted water rises proving fatal to fish. Other biological/chemical phenomenon may also be at work. H.R. suggests that this decomposition on the bottom of the lake could also be liberating phosphates, methane and or heavy metals on the bottom. These could all be exacerbating the toxicity of the anoxic water.

The bottom line is very simple. Major fish kills are not caused by natural "lake inversions". They are caused by human pollution. This started in the 60's and was responded to sucessfully at first. It's back and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment know full well it's caused by us. The question is whether the M.O.E. will continue to deceive or not. You can fool some of the people some of the time but.... .

Wednesday, September 5, 2012


Today's Waterloo Region Record has the following story "Ministry investigating thousands of rotting fish on Lake Erie shore". Quoting an on-line commenter to the Record's story "Something smells about this fish kill". At this point in time it appears as if the Ontario Ministry of the Environment are throwing out the possibility of natural causes including a "lake inversion". The M.O.E. of course are keeping their options open as "...the investigation is continuing.". My guess is that they want to see if the lake inversion phenomenon also referred to as the lake "rolling over" will sell to the locals and the public.

"lake inversion" refers to rapid cooling of the surface water, causing it to sink to the bottom layer which has a lower oxygen content. This lower oxygenated water then rises depriving the fish of the oxygen they require. There are a number of problems with this theory including the fact that, at most to date, we've had barely a handful of cool nights needed to dramatically lower the water temperature. Also of significance is a well known zone in lake Erie called the "dead zone". This is a large area of water with already lowered oxygen levels due to causes other than temperature change. Finally this time of year toxic algae are fluorishing due to warm temperatures, low rainfall and farm nutrients in the water.

The only way we the public will learn the whole truth is if our government decides to be absolutely forthcoming. My experience indicates that if this massive fish kill has anything to do with man made circumstances or pollution, we will not be so informed. Also keep in mind readers that this lake is the location for the future planned Pipeline to supply the ever expanding Waterloo Region with it's water. Do you think the already committed politicians want to hear anything bad about our proposed future source of water?

Tuesday, September 4, 2012


Last Saturday's Waterloo Region Record has this story "Who is willing to store our nuclear waste?" It covers more than one entire newspaper page. The timing is equisite for those proponents of siting nuclear waste in or around residential communities. Unemployment is high and rising and any jobs generally speaking are better than none.

The economic arguments and even the moral ones are very strong. We all use energy derived from nuclear power including here in Woolwich Township. We have an obligation to be responsible with the radioactive waste produced. This generation as well as the next needs employment that this repository could assist with.

I have a few questions for readers. One is if they want to put this stuff hundreds of metres below ground why would you do so anywhere near one of the Great lakes? Secondly why do you need to put it anywhere near human communities? This is a vast land. Yes we have roads, helicopters and planes. Why not site this thing in a country as large as Canada where people are not nearby? Thirdly and this for me may be my biggest concern. Professional liars are in charge of the process. They are also known as politicians. Here in Canada we have both world class politicians and world class liars. Often they go hand in hand. Here in Elmira and Woolwich Township our political authorities have been involved in a twenty year plus scam and intentional deception of the public in regards to our drinking water. To date I still have confidence in our current municipal Council but that's it folks. Past municipal Councils, Regional and provincial governments have lied, deceived and covered up the truth and still are.

So if you can't trust the driving force behind this process (government) why would anyone think that they would negotiate with you in good faith? Citizens will be given the mushroom treatment plus the benefits will be magnified and the risks minimized. This is where the rubber hits the road for me regarding storage of nuclear waste in anyone's community.

Monday, September 3, 2012


"It's a ton of money but misses the radar." This is a quote from Kitchener Councillor Tom Galloway in last Saturday's Waterloo Region Record. He's right but the fact is if government's would focus more on their core services such as water and sewage our taxes would be an awful lot lower and our governments would have greater financial flexibility during crises. The title of the front page of the local section article is "Sewage plan to cost $250M". The treatment plant that will receive these upgrades is the Kitchener plant at the south end of Kitchener near the Doon area. "Planners say this will meet environmental regulations, reduce odours and improve water quality, benefiting the health of the river and serving downstream residents who draw drinking water from it." Further "When completed there will be less ammonia in the Grand to bother fish, less phosphorus and fewer pharmaceutical traces left by drugs flushed into sewers.".

All of this is good news and I personally may criticize the Region for wasting millions of dollars on non essentials but sewage and drinking water are near the top of the heap for necessary expenditures. That being said I find the pharmaceuticals comment both curious and forthcoming. I've looked for years at the testing results for Regional water taken from wells located beside and within the influence of the Grand River as well as results from the water taken directly from the river . If they are testing for pharmacueticals then just like many other contaminants; they aren't sharing the results with the public.

Two other issues come to mind. The one is pure volume of sewage. It's been increasing by leaps and bounds over the last fifty years and credit for that goes to both our provincial and federal governments. Under the guise of humanity and decency, Canada has been accepting "refugees" in massive quantities. Come on people, wake up. Our politicians are neither decent nor humane. They are increasing Canada's population by leaps and bounds for their personal financial gain and that of their supporters. All of this puts an ever increasing environmental load on our rivers and water supplies. These proposed upgrades will be swallowed up very quickly by the ever increasing amounts of raw sewage being discharged to these plants and then treated and released into the river.

Secondly while politicians know this very well they will continue to deceive the public. Again as per the Record's story "Galloway said he's relying on advice from staff and consultants as well as public tendering to ensure the sewage upgrade is not overbuilt or overdesigned." Please! That is pure political puffery. Probably these upgrades should have been done a decade ago and most likely as we continue to bring massive numbers of new immigrants into this country these "upgrades" will be outdated within a year or two of being completed. All of these upgrade costs are directly related to more immigration. It kind of reminds me of a pyramid scheme. You need to constantly increase your membership as the new members are there to pay for the costs of the last batch of arrivals. Like a pyramid scheme it is not sustainable.

Saturday, September 1, 2012


Further in regards to Thursday night's public CPAC meeting, should include the CPAC members on a number of occasions reminding the M.O.E. and Chemtura that there are other sources of contamination to the Municipal Aquifers in Elmira. Steve Martindale suggested that "we don't need to differentiate". I clarified that, by advising that yes all these other sites do need to be differentiated because otherwise would be treating them all as if they had only and specifically contributed readily dissolved contaminants to the aquifers. Whether gas stations or industrial concerns any DNAPLS, LNAPLS or subsurface wastes, sludges and tars have to be removed or remediated in order for the off-site pump and treat system and wells to have half a chance to do their job.

Ron Campbell has been doing a great job in calmly bursting balloons sent forth by the M.O.E. and Chemtura/CRA. Again Steve M. of the M.O.E. made the bold statement that all M.O.E. agreements with industries have Indemnities included. He was trying to downplay the significance of the reprehensible and long secret October 7, 1991 Settlement Agreement aka "sweetheart deal" between Uniroyal (Chemtura) and the Ontario M.O.E.. Ron pointed out in his decades long experience dealing with polluted sites and M.O.E. Control Orders that Indemnities with polluters absolutely were not the norm. To this Steve responded true but the Indemnities were associated with M.O.E. agreements (private) not with the public Control Orders issued to polluting companies. Steve then further relented and said yes there are very few private agreements and hence very few Indemnities.

Lastly I had to clarify self serving hydrogeological interpretations sent forth by both Alan Deal of Conestoga Rovers (CRA) and then echoed by Jeff Merriman on behalf of Chemtura. They claim that the large reduction in concentration of Chlorobenzene from the OW57-32R observation well from 1998 to recently proves that there is not nor was DNAPL (dense non aqueous phase liquid) present in the subsurface. This is storytelling and untruthful. In and of itself it proves that by locating a pumping well (W4) literally a few feet away and in the same aquifer, that you can indeed pump out the DNAPL faster than it can dissolve, hence significantly reducing concentrations of dissolved contaminants. Slow dissolving is but one of the characteristics of DNAPLS. Low solubility is another. This well (W4) will need to be pumping at current rates for decades to centuries more depending on the volume of free phase DNAPL in the subsurface, continuously, slowly dissolving. Although low solubility is a characteristic of DNAPL the solubility of chlorobenzene is still thousands of times greater than the Ontario Drinking Water Standards. It is probably technically possible if you pump long enough and hard enough to eventually get the DISSOLVED concentrations of Chlorobenzene below 80 ppb.; the drinking standard. Then what? Do you want to be drinking this water knowing that all it takes is a power failure or a pump malfunction for the concentrations to start rising again? I don't. This is the scam being perpetrated on the public. Those sources need to be honestly investigated, for the first time and removed/remediated. Anything else is just playing games.